13 Mar 2013: Brisbane City Council and the Bus Review

[ozbob]

Media release 13th March 2013



Brisbane City Council and the Bus Review

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport urges Brisbane City Council to provide bipartisan support to allow the Go Network to go ahead.

Why is the current bus network unsustainable?

1. It prioritises transporting air over transporting passengers.

2. Too many routes means too much complexity. For example, 9 different buses go to the Centenary suburbs; They are 450,453,454,455,456,457,458,459 and 452;  None are frequent. Some buses go to Mt Ommaney first, some go via the Centenary Highway, others go via the Western Freeway, or via the Western Freeway but then Coronation Drive, some stop at Indooroopilly, some don't; Some stop at Milton, others don't One goes to the Darra railway station clockwise in the morning, but then anticlockwise in the afternoon.

3. The current bus network is financially unsustainable and being kept afloat by escalating 15% and 20% annual fare increases. Passengers will not wear fare increases of this magnitude. The previous state government lost an election on the back of this very issue.

4. More buses means the CBD is being flooded with buses Brisbane City Council's own Lord Mayors Mass Transit Report 2007 warned that the current direct service paradigm would lead to massive delays and congestion, which it has at Cultural Centre. This is only going to get worse. There is little capacity left in the CBD for yet even more buses to swamp it. Collapse of the entire bus network is now routine during mild congestion and periods of rain.

5. It denies frequent service to outer suburbs of Brisbane. Money is being spent on duplication required to drive air-laden buses all the way to the CBD. That's money better spent on moving real people in Centenary, The Northwest, Yeronga, Bulimba and so forth on frequent all day services.

6. Connection based networks are the status quo in large cities such as Perth, Vancouver, Paris, and Toronto. The Lord Mayor should look at Toronto, where 98% of buses connect to trains, fares are low, services are simple and frequent and fare revenue covers ~ 70% of operations (system-wide). Toronto carried almost 500 million trips last year. Closer to home, Perth, Western Australia runs a similar feeder system to their trains which now carry more patronage than Brisbane's trains do, despite being a smaller city with a lower population. More recently Auckland, NZ is pushing through a similar frequent network reform based on connections, unlocking access to frequent all day service to the entire city. Brisbane is at risk of being left behind.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"We disagree with the Lord Mayor, Graham Quirk about his position on bus connections.

Failure to move forward will ultimately lead to:

1. Escalating fare rises of 15% or higher to support a system that carries more air than passengers.

2. Longer commutes due to regular collapse of the bus system during rain or congestion, for example on Coronation Drive.

3. A congested CBD full of bus gridlock and routine failure of the bus system, destroying Brisbane's livability.

4. Harder to attract jobs and employers as other, competing cities such as Auckland, upgrade their bus networks and offer frequent services to the entire area of the city.

5. Inability to provide frequent, simple and reliable service to outer Brisbane suburbs such as Centenary and the Northwest.

We urge the Lord Mayor, Graham Quirk, and his Brisbane City Council colleagues to consider very carefully their opposition to reforms that have been successfully carried out and operated in cities overseas.  Not acting to sort out the bus network to maximise efficiency and connections, and use the other modes optimally is consigning SEQ to more transport failure."

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

References:

1. Auckland Bus Network Reforms http://www.humantransit.org/2012/10/auckland-how-network-redesign-can-transform-a-citys-possibilities.html

2. "Networks that are designed to prevent transferring must run massive volumes of half-empty and quarter-empty buses and still have trouble delivering frequencies that make the service worth waiting for.  The waste involved can be colossal, as you can see from the amount of service we were able to redeploy in more useful ways with this redesign."

3. Connections vs complexity http://www.humantransit.org/2010/11/connections-vs-complexity.html

4. Transferring" can be good for you, and good for your city http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/why-transferring-is-good-for-you-and-good-for-your-city.html

[ozbob]

Discussion thread --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9045.msg121732#msg121732

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

13th March 2013

Re: Brisbane City Council and the Bus Review

Greetings,

More reason to get on with network changes, recent Auckland Bus Review; Connections based bus network covers all of Auckland
in frequent bus service. ----> http://www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/improving-transport/plans-proposals/IntegratedTravel/Documents/rptp/frequent-service.pdf

Failure to upgrade Brisbane's bus network likewise will leave Brisbane city behind competitors overseas.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

Media release 13th March 2013



Brisbane City Council and the Bus Review

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport urges Brisbane City Council to provide bipartisan support to allow the Go Network to go ahead.

Why is the current bus network unsustainable?

1. It prioritises transporting air over transporting passengers.

2. Too many routes means too much complexity. For example, 9 different buses go to the Centenary suburbs; They are 450,453,454,455,456,457,458,459 and 452;  None are frequent. Some buses go to Mt Ommaney first, some go via the Centenary Highway, others go via the Western Freeway, or via the Western Freeway but then Coronation Drive, some stop at Indooroopilly, some don't; Some stop at Milton, others don't One goes to the Darra railway station clockwise in the morning, but then anticlockwise in the afternoon.

3. The current bus network is financially unsustainable and being kept afloat by escalating 15% and 20% annual fare increases. Passengers will not wear fare increases of this magnitude. The previous state government lost an election on the back of this very issue.

4. More buses means the CBD is being flooded with buses Brisbane City Council's own Lord Mayors Mass Transit Report 2007 warned that the current direct service paradigm would lead to massive delays and congestion, which it has at Cultural Centre. This is only going to get worse. There is little capacity left in the CBD for yet even more buses to swamp it. Collapse of the entire bus network is now routine during mild congestion and periods of rain.

5. It denies frequent service to outer suburbs of Brisbane. Money is being spent on duplication required to drive air-laden buses all the way to the CBD. That's money better spent on moving real people in Centenary, The Northwest, Yeronga, Bulimba and so forth on frequent all day services.

6. Connection based networks are the status quo in large cities such as Perth, Vancouver, Paris, and Toronto. The Lord Mayor should look at Toronto, where 98% of buses connect to trains, fares are low, services are simple and frequent and fare revenue covers ~ 70% of operations (system-wide). Toronto carried almost 500 million trips last year. Closer to home, Perth, Western Australia runs a similar feeder system to their trains which now carry more patronage than Brisbane's trains do, despite being a smaller city with a lower population. More recently Auckland, NZ is pushing through a similar frequent network reform based on connections, unlocking access to frequent all day service to the entire city. Brisbane is at risk of being left behind.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"We disagree with the Lord Mayor, Graham Quirk about his position on bus connections.

Failure to move forward will ultimately lead to:

1. Escalating fare rises of 15% or higher to support a system that carries more air than passengers.

2. Longer commutes due to regular collapse of the bus system during rain or congestion, for example on Coronation Drive.

3. A congested CBD full of bus gridlock and routine failure of the bus system, destroying Brisbane's livability.

4. Harder to attract jobs and employers as other, competing cities such as Auckland, upgrade their bus networks and offer frequent services to the entire area of the city.

5. Inability to provide frequent, simple and reliable service to outer Brisbane suburbs such as Centenary and the Northwest.

We urge the Lord Mayor, Graham Quirk, and his Brisbane City Council colleagues to consider very carefully their opposition to reforms that have been successfully carried out and operated in cities overseas.  Not acting to sort out the bus network to maximise efficiency and connections, and use the other modes optimally is consigning SEQ to more transport failure."

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

References:

1. Auckland Bus Network Reforms http://www.humantransit.org/2012/10/auckland-how-network-redesign-can-transform-a-citys-possibilities.html

2. "Networks that are designed to prevent transferring must run massive volumes of half-empty and quarter-empty buses and still have trouble delivering frequencies that make the service worth waiting for.  The waste involved can be colossal, as you can see from the amount of service we were able to redeploy in more useful ways with this redesign."

3. Connections vs complexity http://www.humantransit.org/2010/11/connections-vs-complexity.html

4. Transferring" can be good for you, and good for your city http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/why-transferring-is-good-for-you-and-good-for-your-city.html

[brismike]

You missed the 460 which also services the Centenary Suburbs.

[ozbob]

Yes, thanks.  Missed that one, so another!   

[Andrew]

I think that media release was really poor form.  The councillors are only doing their job which is serving the people they represent.  They would be negligent in their duties if they didn't.

[SurfRail]

I think that media release was really poor form.  The councillors are only doing their job which is serving the people they represent.  They would be negligent in their duties if they didn't.

They lose credibility with me for not speaking up about basic issues which are being identified in this review which we have been banging on about forever.  That and all the histrionics.

They aren't experts, but they can't seriously say nobody has raised these issues before.

The issue most of us have identified is that this is a case of Brisbane exceptionalism.  SEQ is a region much bigger than BCC, and we seriously get tired of having to deal with the parochialism of local governments who aren't interested in what is beyond their borders.  Hence why I keep advocating for the state to take over BT, no matter how they plan on doing it - wrest control off the council so the whole region can benefit with a better designed network which doesn't respect arbitrary local government boundaries.

[#Metro]

They lose credibility with me for not speaking up about basic issues which are being identified in this review which we have been banging on about forever.  That and all the histrionics.

A lot of councillors oppose things to generate a lot of media and raise their profile, even if it actually has a good outcome. Do you want 10 low frequency bus routes that fan out to Centenary or just 2 high frequency ones that you can use.

They have their role and we have ours. We don't have a barrow to push, other than the high frequency decent PT one!!

[ozbob]

[#Metro]

^ We all know that City Hall in in charge of PT, not TransLink, even if the legislation says so...

[somebody]

I think that media release was really poor form.  The councillors are only doing their job which is serving the people they represent.  They would be negligent in their duties if they didn't.

The council is an obstacle.  I think failing to recognise that is poor form.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

15th March 2013

Something that every Brisbane City Councillor should read!

Greetings,

A lot of discussion at Brisbane City Council on Tuesday about the bus review.

A map of key transit choices ----> http://urbanist.typepad.com/files/abundant-access-diagram-1.pdf

Sets out nicely the choices the city has, particularly with the three issues BCC seems to have issue with:

1. Walking distance - longer walks to bus stop give faster buses, more patronage; conversely shorter walks give slower buses, less patronage

2. Connections - more connections gives simplicity and frequency, fewer connections gives no transfer but clogged CBD and great complexity (such as 10 low frequency routes to Centenary Suburbs)

3. Coverage or ridership - Lots of coverage of low frequency services; less coverage gives higher frequency but better quality of service.

Each area of the city will have different needs which is what the consultation is all about. Jarrett's book (particularly chapter 12 on connections) is also particularly good at understanding the issues --> https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Human+Transit+google+books

Great for BCC councillors to read and any concerned citizens or interested media in understanding the issues. If anyone wants to see bus to bus connections in action, please visit Cultural Centre or Boggo Road busway in the morning. Lots of people changing from bus to bus or bus to train because the next service is always coming soon.

We look forward to the results of this third round of bus review consultations.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org


Reference

http://www.humantransit.org/

Media release 13th March 2013



Brisbane City Council and the Bus Review

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport urges Brisbane City Council to provide bipartisan support to allow the Go Network to go ahead.

Why is the current bus network unsustainable?

1. It prioritises transporting air over transporting passengers.

2. Too many routes means too much complexity. For example, 9 different buses go to the Centenary suburbs; They are 450,453,454,455,456,457,458,459 and 452;  None are frequent. Some buses go to Mt Ommaney first, some go via the Centenary Highway, others go via the Western Freeway, or via the Western Freeway but then Coronation Drive, some stop at Indooroopilly, some don't; Some stop at Milton, others don't One goes to the Darra railway station clockwise in the morning, but then anticlockwise in the afternoon.

3. The current bus network is financially unsustainable and being kept afloat by escalating 15% and 20% annual fare increases. Passengers will not wear fare increases of this magnitude. The previous state government lost an election on the back of this very issue.

4. More buses means the CBD is being flooded with buses Brisbane City Council's own Lord Mayors Mass Transit Report 2007 warned that the current direct service paradigm would lead to massive delays and congestion, which it has at Cultural Centre. This is only going to get worse. There is little capacity left in the CBD for yet even more buses to swamp it. Collapse of the entire bus network is now routine during mild congestion and periods of rain.

5. It denies frequent service to outer suburbs of Brisbane. Money is being spent on duplication required to drive air-laden buses all the way to the CBD. That's money better spent on moving real people in Centenary, The Northwest, Yeronga, Bulimba and so forth on frequent all day services.

6. Connection based networks are the status quo in large cities such as Perth, Vancouver, Paris, and Toronto. The Lord Mayor should look at Toronto, where 98% of buses connect to trains, fares are low, services are simple and frequent and fare revenue covers ~ 70% of operations (system-wide). Toronto carried almost 500 million trips last year. Closer to home, Perth, Western Australia runs a similar feeder system to their trains which now carry more patronage than Brisbane's trains do, despite being a smaller city with a lower population. More recently Auckland, NZ is pushing through a similar frequent network reform based on connections, unlocking access to frequent all day service to the entire city. Brisbane is at risk of being left behind.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"We disagree with the Lord Mayor, Graham Quirk about his position on bus connections.

Failure to move forward will ultimately lead to:

1. Escalating fare rises of 15% or higher to support a system that carries more air than passengers.

2. Longer commutes due to regular collapse of the bus system during rain or congestion, for example on Coronation Drive.

3. A congested CBD full of bus gridlock and routine failure of the bus system, destroying Brisbane's livability.

4. Harder to attract jobs and employers as other, competing cities such as Auckland, upgrade their bus networks and offer frequent services to the entire area of the city.

5. Inability to provide frequent, simple and reliable service to outer Brisbane suburbs such as Centenary and the Northwest.

We urge the Lord Mayor, Graham Quirk, and his Brisbane City Council colleagues to consider very carefully their opposition to reforms that have been successfully carried out and operated in cities overseas.  Not acting to sort out the bus network to maximise efficiency and connections, and use the other modes optimally is consigning SEQ to more transport failure."

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

References:

1. Auckland Bus Network Reforms http://www.humantransit.org/2012/10/auckland-how-network-redesign-can-transform-a-citys-possibilities.html

2. "Networks that are designed to prevent transferring must run massive volumes of half-empty and quarter-empty buses and still have trouble delivering frequencies that make the service worth waiting for.  The waste involved can be colossal, as you can see from the amount of service we were able to redeploy in more useful ways with this redesign."

3. Connections vs complexity http://www.humantransit.org/2010/11/connections-vs-complexity.html

4. Transferring" can be good for you, and good for your city http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/why-transferring-is-good-for-you-and-good-for-your-city.html

[Andrew]

I think that media release was really poor form.  The councillors are only doing their job which is serving the people they represent.  They would be negligent in their duties if they didn't.

The council is an obstacle.  I think failing to recognise that is poor form.

Of course I know they can be an obstacle and I agree that sometimes it's a bad thing.  In this case, however, I think it's good that they are because they're looking after the residents of their wards.